Re: additions to java-policy
On Friday 18 July 2003 11:03, Stefan Gybas wrote:
> Jan Schulz wrote:
> I've also come to the conclusion that adding the version number to JARs
> in /usr/share/java/ is a bad idea. Take for example libxercres2-java: If
> you've used /usr/share/java/xercesImpl-2.3.0.jar in another package and
> then upgraded to Xerces-J 2.4.0 your package will not work any longer.
> You would have to use a version package dependency on libxerces2-java,
> but then you can simply use /usr/share/java/xercesImpl.jar directly.
> Appending the version would only make sense if the package name also
> contained the version so you could install multiple versions at the same
> time.
Which is the case: libxerces-java and libxerces2-java...
Since Xerces tends to give a lot of trouble moving from one version to
another, even within the 2.x series!, a more granular packaging would
be nice... i.e. separate packages for 2.3 and 2.4, etc...
The alternative would be to file bugs against packages with fail to work
when the next Xerces2 package is made... which is fine too.
> BTW, I've not seen any package that usees the versioned JAR - so
> it obviously is not useful.
In my mentors.debian.net packages (jmol, cdk, jchempaint) it actually
refers to the version jar in /usr/share/java, because of the problems one
now and then encounters with using several Xerces2 versions...
Anyway, if I understand correctly, the only reason why you think it is
unneeded, is that it is not clearly used. However, I would like to mention
that I would prioritize the similarity with non-Java libraries higher...
Egon
Reply to: